alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2020399EN.01002801.xml

| 23.11.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 399/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.11.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/28

---

Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis v EACEA

(Case T-408/18) (1)

(Arbitration clause - Grant agreement entered into under Erasmus Mundus action programme No 3 for the promotion of higher education - Grant agreement entered into under the programme for lifelong learning - Eligible costs - Debit notes - Repayment of part of the sums advanced - Contractual liability)

(2020/C 399/39)

Language of the case: Greek

Parties

Applicant: Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis (Thessaloniki, Greece) (represented by: V. Christianos, lawyer)

Defendant: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (represented by: H. Monet and P. Kalyva, acting as Agents, and G. Dellis, K. Sakellariou and A. Chasapopoulos, lawyers)

Re:

Action under Article 272 TFEU seeking, first, a declaration that the debts set out in debit notes with reference numbers 3241804682 and 3241804913 of 9 and 16 April 2018 issued by the EACEA against the applicant represent eligible costs of EUR 28 976,83 and EUR 77 169,78, respectively, and, second, an order that the EACEA repay those sums to the applicant, together with default interest.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Aristoteleio Panepistimio Thessalonikis to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 319, 10.9.2018.

---
EXHIBIT 32



                   CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT
           BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
           PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleY Act of 2002, we, the undersigned
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Aura Systems, Inc. (the
"Company"), hereby certify, based on our knowledge, that the Quarterly Report on
Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended November 30, 2004 (the
"Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.

Date: March 23, 2005                           /s/ Dennis Calvert
                                               ------------------
                                               Dennis Calvert
                                               Chief Executive Officer

Date: March 23, 2005                           /s/ Dennis Calvert
                                               ------------------
                                               Dennis Calvert
                                               Interim Chief Financial Officer
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4281 

To amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to expand access to capital 

for rural-area small businesses, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 7, 2017 

Mr. KIHUEN (for himself and Mr. MOONEY of West Virginia) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to expand 

access to capital for rural-area small businesses, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Expanding Access to 

5 Capital for Rural Job Creators Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. ACCESS TO CAPITAL FOR RURAL-AREA SMALL BUSI7 NESSES. 

8 Section 4 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 

9 U.S.C. 78d) is amended— 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4281 IH

1 (1) in subsection (j)(4)(C), by striking ‘‘and 

2 women-owned small businesses’’ and inserting ‘‘, 

3 women-owned, and rural-area small businesses’’; and 

4 (2) in subsection (j)(6)(B)(iii), by striking ‘‘and 

5 women-owned small businesses’’ and inserting ‘‘, 

6 women-owned, and rural-area small businesses’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKBCBPHB2PROD with BILLS
From: "Pettis, Mike" < mike.pettis@owenscorning.com >

To: Susan Fairchild/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: "Gould, Ken" < ken.gould@owenscorning.com >

Date: 01/18/2012 09:35 AM

Subject: Resend of OC Public version of the 114 request response

Susan, In this resend of the information provided on Dec 21st, I have attached each file separately. If

you have an issue opening these please let me know.

Mike Petti s
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 112 (Wednesday, July 25, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5211]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                       HAPPY 75TH BIRTHDAY, SPAM

  (Mr. WALZ of Minnesota asked and was given permission to address the 
House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. WALZ of Minnesota. I rise today to honor southern Minnesota's own 
Hormel Foods for its 75 years of producing its world-renowned, iconic 
product--SPAM.
  Entrepreneur George Hormel opened up his meat processing plant in 
1891 in Austin, Minnesota, but it was his son Jay who came up with the 
idea of canned spice ham. Thus, in 1937, SPAM was born. SPAM served an 
essential role in World War II. Over 100 million pounds of SPAM were 
sent to the European front to aid the war efforts. After the war, 
SPAM's popularity soared globally. Over 7 billion cans have been sold.
  Since the inception of SPAM, Hormel has always kept its company's 
roots in southern Minnesota, providing thousands of good-paying jobs 
and economic stability for middle class folks in Austin. Hormel also 
has a rich history of giving back. They've partnered with organizations 
to provide food for malnourished children around the world. In 
partnership with the University of Minnesota and the Mayo Clinic, they 
opened the world-renowned Hormel Institute, which gave us Omega-3 and -
6 fatty acids in cancer reduction.
  SPAM is an important part of our history. It played an essential role 
in feeding our troops, in creating jobs, and it has become an iconic 
American product. So, today, I honor Hormel's past, and I look forward 
to their future. Happy 75th birthday, SPAM.

                          ____________________
```
#### L. B. Smith Co., Inc., Appellant, *v.*Aetna Standard Engineering Co., Appellee.

(No. 31969

Decided December 21, 1949.)

*Messrs. Mitchell, Mitchell & Reed*and *Messrs. Smith, Ristig & Smith,*for appellant.

*Mr. T. Lamar Jaclcson*and *Messrs. Harrington, Huxley é Smith,*for appellee.

It is ordered and adjudged that this appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason that no debatable constitutional question is involved.

*Appeal dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Matthias, Hart, Zimmerman, Stewart, Turner and Taft, JJ., concur.
#### E. J. BURKE, Plaintiff in Error, v. Gerald POINDEXTER, Defendant in Error.

No. 37472.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma.

June 25, 1957.

*1098Roy Frye, Sr., Roy Frye, Jr., Sallisaw, for plaintiff in error.

J. Fred Green, Fred D. Green, W. S. 'Agent, Sallisaw, for defendant in error.

CORN, Vice Chief Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment, rendered upon a jury verdict, the fifth successive case tried (December 1, 1955) against defendant at the same *term*of court, and involved the same issues as Burke v. McKenzie, Okl., 313 P.2d 1090.

Of the twelve jurors empaneled to try the case one had signed verdicts in the other four cases, five had signed verdicts in three cases, one signed the verdict in two cases, two had signed verdicts in two cases and had sat on the third case, one had signed verdict and had sat in another case. One juror- had not participated in any previous trial. The decisive question presented on appeal is controlled by our decision in Burke v. McKenzie, supra.

The judgment accordingly is reversed and the case remanded for new trial.
EX-4.1




 Exhibit 4.1 
  






 
 NUMBER 001 RAMACO SHARES INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE AUTHORIZED: COMMON SHARES, CUSIP
75134P 30 3 $0.01 PAR VALUE PER SHARE SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS This Certifies That is the owner of SPECIMEN Fully Paid and Non-Assessable Common Stock, $0.01 Par Value of RAMACO RESOURCES, INC. By 6201 transferable on the books of this
Corporation in person or by attorney upon surrender of this Certificate duly endorsed or assigned. Brooklyn,15th AMERICAN This Certificate and the shares represented hereby are subject to the laws of the State of Delaware, and to the Articles of
Incorporation NY Countersigned: and the Bylaws of the Corporation, as now or hereafter amended. This Certificate is not valid until countersigned by the Transfer Agent. Transfer Avenue, STOCK IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused this
Certificate to be signed by the facsimile signatures of its Agent 11219 duly authorized officers and to be sealed with the facsimile seal of the Corporation. and TRANSFER & Registrar Dated: RESOURC TRUST A C O ES , Authorized M RPORA I N A O T C
R C E . Officer COMPANY, LLC EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER DELAWAR E SPECIMEN SEAL 








 



 
 RAMACO RESOURCES, INC. AMERICAN STOCK TRANSFER & TRUST COMPANY, LLC TRANSFER FEE: AS REQUIRED The following abbreviations, when used
in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM - as tenants in common TEN ENT - as tenants by the entireties UNIF GIFT MIN ACT
– Custodian JT TEN - as joint tenants with right (Cust) (Minor) of survivorship and not as under Uniform Gifts to Minors tenants in common Act Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. (State) PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL
SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE FOR VALUE RECEIVED, hereby sell, assign and transfer unto PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS INCLUDING POSTAL ZIP CODE OF ASSIGNEE Shares of the Common Stock represented by the within
Certificate and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint Attorney to transfer the said stock on the books of the within-named Corporation, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: 20, Signature: X Signature(s) Guaranteed:
Signature: X THE SIGNATURE(S) TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME(S) AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR, WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER. THE SIGNATURE(S) SHOULD BE GUARANTEED BY AN
ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (Banks, Stockbrokers, Savings and Loan Associations and Credit Unions) WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM, PURSUANT TO S.E.C. RULE 17Ad-15.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 11
                         SCIENTIFIC GAMES HOLDINGS CORP.
                        COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                      (IN THOUSANDS EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)







<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                          Three-month period            Six-month period
                                                             ended June 30,               ended June 30,
                                                           1998          1997          1998          1997
                                                           ----          ----          ----          ----
<S>                                                     <C>           <C>            <C>           <C>      
Net income(loss) .................................      $  4,853      $ (6,653)      $  8,629      $ (1,166)

ADD:  In-process technology and pull-tab
 business write-offs, net of tax .................             0        12,502              0        12,502
                                                        --------      --------       --------      --------
Net income excluding write-offs ..................         4,853         5,849          8,629        11,336
                                                        ========      ========       --------      ========
Average common shares outstanding - basic ........        12,316        12,142         12,153        12,152

Dilutive effect of stock options and
non-vested restricted stock awards ...............           189           421            251           428
                                                        --------      --------       --------      --------
Average common shares outstanding - diluted ......        12,505        12,563         12,404        12,580
                                                        ========      ========       ========      ========
Basic net income(loss) per common share ..........      $   0.39      $  (0.55)      $   0.71      $  (0.10)
                                                        ========      ========       ========      ========
Diluted net income(loss) per common share ........      $   0.39      $  (0.55)      $   0.70      $  (0.10)
                                                        ========      ========       ========      ========
Pro forma net income per common share,
excluding write-offs - basic .....................      $   0.39      $   0.48       $   0.71      $   0.93
                                                        ========      ========       ========      ========
Pro forma net income per common share,
excluding write-offs - diluted ...................      $   0.39      $   0.47       $   0.70      $   0.90
                                                        ========      ========       ========      ========
</TABLE>
May 20, 1997

19366

#### Fukuhara v. Dames and Moore

Affirmed
# C_2020390EN.01001201.xml

| 16.11.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 390/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.11.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 390/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 16 September 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Comisión Nacional de los Mercados y la Competencia — Spain) — proceedings against Asociación Nacional de Empresas Estibadoras y Consignatarios de Buques (Anesco), Comisiones Obreras, Coordinadora Estatal de Trabajadores del Mar (CETM), Confederación Intersindical Gallega, Eusko Langileen Alkartasuna, Langile Abertzaleen Batzordeak, Unión General de Trabajadores (UGT)

(Case C-462/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Meaning of ‘court or tribunal’ for the purposes of Article 267 TFEU - Criteria - Comisión Nacional de los Mercados y la Competencia (National Commission on Markets and Competition, Spain) - Inadmissibility of the request for a preliminary ruling)

(2020/C 390/16)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring body

Comisión Nacional de los Mercados y la Competencia

Parties to the main proceedings

Asociación Nacional de Empresas Estibadoras y Consignatarios de Buques (Anesco), Comisiones Obreras, Coordinadora Estatal de Trabajadores del Mar (CETM), Confederación Intersindical Gallega, Eusko Langileen Alkartasuna, Langile Abertzaleen Batzordeak, Unión General de Trabajadores (UGT)

Interested party: Asociación Estatal de Empresas Operadoras Portuarias (Asoport)

Operative part of the judgment

The request for a preliminary ruling from the Comisión Nacional de los Mercados y la Competencia (National Commission on Markets and Competition, Spain), made by decision of 12 June 2019, is inadmissible.

---

(1)  OJ C 357, 21.10.2019.

---
# C_2021079EN.01001402.xml

| 8.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/14

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 14 January 2021 — European Commission v Italian Republic

(Case C-744/19) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2013/59/Euratom - Basic safety standards for protection against the dangers arising from exposure to ionising radiation - Article 106 - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

(2021/C 79/17)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: R. Tricot and G. Gattinara, Agents)

Defendant: Italian Republic (represented by: G. Palmieri, Agent, and C. Colelli, avvocato dello Stato)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom of 5 December 2013 laying down basic safety standards for protection against the dangers arising from exposure to ionising radiation, and repealing Directives 89/618/Euratom, 90/641/Euratom, 96/29/Euratom, 97/43/Euratom and 2003/122/Euratom, and by failing to communicate to the European Commission the text of the provisions of national law adopted, where necessary, in the field governed by Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 106(1) and (3) of that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to adopt, within the prescribed period, the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom of 5 December 2013 laying down basic safety standards for protection against the dangers arising from exposure to ionising radiation, and repealing Directives 89/618/Euratom, 90/641/Euratom, 96/29/Euratom, 97/43/Euratom and 2003/122/Euratom, and by failing to communicate to the European Commission the text of the provisions of national law adopted, where necessary, in the field governed by Council Directive 2013/59/Euratom, the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 106(1) and (3) of that directive;

| 2. | Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Italian Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 399, 25.11.2019.

---
##### 



DEAN HELLERSecretary of State
    
    EXHIBIT 3.11204 North Carson Street, Suite 1Carson City, Nevada 89701 -4299(775) 684 5708Website: secretaryofstate.bizCertificate of Designation(PURSUANT TO NRS 78.1955)Important: Read attached instructions before completing form.
    
    ABOVE SPACE IS FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
 CERTIFICATE OF DESIGNATION  FOR NEVADA PROFIT CORPORATIONS  (PURSUANT TO NRS 78.1955)
 1.
    
    Name of corporation: Great Western Land and Recreation, Inc.2.
    
    By resolution of the board of directors pursuant to a provision in the articles of
incorporation, this certificate establishes the following regarding the voting powers,
designations, preferences, limitations, restrictions and relative rights of the following
class or series of stock:
   3.
    
    Effective date of filing (optional):(must not be later than 90 days after the certificate is filed)
 4.
    
    Officer Signature:
    
    /s/ Ron OConnor




---



##### 



CERTIFICATE OF DESIGNATIONS  OF  SERIES B CUMULATIVE CONVERTIBLE PREFERRED STOCK  OF  GREAT WESTERN LAND AND RECREATION, INC.  (PURSUANT TO SECTION 151 OF THE  NEVADA GENERAL CORPORATION LAW)
 Section 151
  Series B Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock
 I. DESIGNATION AND AMOUNT
  II. RANK
   1




---



##### 



III. DIVIDENDS
  For the first year from date of issuance
    
    2.0% of the Stated Value per annumFor the second year from date of issuance
    
    3.0% of the Stated Value per annumFor the third year from date of issuance
    
    3.5% of the Stated Value per annumThereafter
    
    4.0% of the Stated Value per annum
    2




---



##### 



IV. LIQUIDATION PREFERENCE
   V. REDEMPTION
     3




---



##### 



VI. RESTRICTIONS ON DIVIDENDS
  4




---



##### 



VII. VOTING RIGHTS
    VIII. CONVERSION
   5




---



##### 



6




---



##### 



IX. ADDITIONAL DEFINITIONS
          X. MISCELLANEOUS
   7




---



##### 



th
 GREAT WESTERN LAND AND RECREATION, INC.By:
Name:
    
    /s/ Jay N. Torok

Jay N. TorokTitle:
    
    President and Chief Executive OfficerATTEST:/s/ Ron OConnor

Name: Ron OConnorTitle: Secretary
 8
# C_2020222EN.01001502.xml

| 6.7.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.7.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/15

---

Judgment of the Court of Justice (First Chamber) of 2 April 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Milano — Italy) — Condominio di Milano, via Meda v Eurothermo SpA

(Case C-329/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Consumer protection - Directive 93/13/EEC - Unfair terms in consumer contracts - Article 1(1) - Article 2(b) - Definition of ‘consumer’ - Commonhold of a building)

(2020/C 222/17)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Milano

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Condominio di Milano, via Meda

Defendant: Eurothermo SpA

Operative part of the judgment

Article 1(1) and Article 2(b) of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts must be interpreted as not precluding national case-law which interprets legislation intended to transpose that directive into national law in such a way that its protective rules of consumer law also apply to a contract between a seller or supplier and a subject of the law such as the condominio in Italian law, notwithstanding that such a subject of the law does not fall within the scope of that directive.

---

(1)  OJ C 288, 26.8.2019.

---
18832

#### State v. Quenga

Affirmed
# C_2021053EN.01001201.xml

| 15.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 53/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 53/12

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 17 December 2020 — Federal Republic of Germany v European Commission, Republic of Finland

(Joined Cases C-475/19 P and C-688/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - Approximation of laws - Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 - Harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products - Harmonised standards and technical regulations - Harmonised standards EN 14342:2013, EN 14904:2006, EN 13341:2005 + A1:2011 and EN 12285-2:2005 - Action for annulment)

(2021/C 53/14)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: J. Möller and R. Kanitz, acting as Agents, and by M. Kottmann, M. Winkelmüller and F. van Schewick, Rechtsanwälte)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: C. Hermes, M. Huttunen and A. Sipos, acting as Agents), Republic of Finland (represented by: S. Hartikainen and A. Laine, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeals; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeals;

| 2. | Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by the European Commission in relation to the present appeals and to the proceedings before the General Court of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear, in addition to its own costs, those incurred by the European Commission in relation to the present appeals and to the proceedings before the General Court of the European Union;

| 3. | Orders the Republic of Finland to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Republic of Finland to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 270, 12.8.2019.

OJ C 372, 4.11.2019.

---